Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36761145›Full record

Trial reportFrontiers in public health2023

Loss-framing of information and pre-vaccination consultation improve COVID-19 vaccine acceptance: A survey experiment.

Kailu Wang, Eliza Lai-Yi Wong, Annie Wai-Ling Cheung, Dong Dong, Eng-Kiong Yeoh

Open access · goldAbstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Frontiers in public health, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
5.2field-weighted citation impact, top 4% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

9 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 19 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Effects of Message Frames and Sources in TikTok Videos for Youth Vaping Cessation: Emotions and Perceived Message Effectiveness as Mediating Mechanisms.The Journal of adolescent health : official publication of the Society for Adolescent Medicine · 2025
    Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Kailu WangCentre for Health Systems and Policy Research, The Jockey Club School of Public Health and Primary Care, Faculty of Medicine, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Shatin, Hong Kong SAR, China.
Eliza Lai-Yi WongCentre for Health Systems and Policy Research, The Jockey Club School of Public Health and Primary Care, Faculty of Medicine, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Shatin, Hong Kong SAR, China.
Annie Wai-Ling CheungCentre for Health Systems and Policy Research, The Jockey Club School of Public Health and Primary Care, Faculty of Medicine, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Shatin, Hong Kong SAR, China.
Dong DongCentre for Health Systems and Policy Research, The Jockey Club School of Public Health and Primary Care, Faculty of Medicine, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Shatin, Hong Kong SAR, China.
Eng-Kiong YeohCentre for Health Systems and Policy Research, The Jockey Club School of Public Health and Primary Care, Faculty of Medicine, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Shatin, Hong Kong SAR, China.
Hong Kong Jockey Club · CNChinese University of Hong Kong · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Backgrounds: Vaccination remains one of the most effective ways to protect populations from COVID-19 infection, severe conditions, and death. This study aims to examine whether the gain/loss-framing of information, provision of subsidized pre-vaccination physician consultation, and cash incentives can improve COVID-19 acceptance amongst adults. Methods: A survey experiment was conducted within a broader cross-sectional survey of people aged 18-64 years in Hong Kong, China. The participants were randomly assigned to one of the eight groups derived from full-factorial design of the three strategies with stratification by age and sex. The vaccine acceptance rate was compared between people with and without any of the strategies. The heterogeneous effects of these strategies were identified for those with different perceptions of the pandemics and vaccine in multiple logistic regressions. Results: The survey experiment collected 1,000 valid responses. It found that loss-framed information and provision of subsidized physician consultation to assess suitability to be vaccinated, can improve vaccine acceptance, while cash incentives did not make a difference. The improvement effect of loss-framing information and physician consultation is stronger among those with higher perceived infection risk and severity of condition, as well as unvaccinated people with lower confidence in vaccine safety. Conclusions: The findings indicated that individualized loss-framing messages and equitable provision of subsidized pre-vaccination physician consultations can be incorporated in efforts to promote vaccine acceptance and vaccination roll-out speed. However, it remains inconclusive whether and how universal cash incentives may be deployed to support vaccination promotion.

Indexed as

COVID-19COVID-19 VaccinesAdultCross-Sectional StudiesHumansPatient Acceptance of Health CareVaccinationCOVID-19 Vaccinesbehavioral interventioncash incentivemessage framingphysician consultationprospect theoryvaccine hesitancy

Identifiers

PMID36761145
PMCPMC9902910
OpenAlexW4317822434

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.